October 15, 2012

And here's that post of mine from last month, before the first debate, about the verb "to like":

It occurred to me that that liberals have quite effectively insinuated the message into our brains that they are likeable, and, in particular, Barack Obama is likeable. And that doesn't just mean that any given individual likes him, subjectively. He is likeable, objectively. If you don't like him, what's wrong with you? You don't seem likeable. You'd better like him or no one will like you. All the likeable people are liberal, so you'd better be liberal or no one will like you.

Remember Biden chastising Paul Ryan in the VP debate for Ryan's helping his constituents to Obama stimulus money even though Ryan voted against it? Message: If you're gonna complain against federal money, then don't take federal money.

okay. how about then we round the circle for our lefty Dem friends like so:President Obama, you say that Mitt Romney should pay more taxes than he does. So, before you, Mr. obama can tell others to pay higher taxes, let's see you and Michelle pay an extra 10% in taxes on your income. Go ahead - lead from behind on this one.

He is an example of what a sales pitch backed by the media can accomplish. It scares the hell out of me. This is how Hitler got going. Obama's eagerness to circumvent the law is another similar fascist quality.

“He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back that’s an earthquake. And then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory.”

The Kid's Social Studies teacher showed Teh Won's convention speech but not Romney's. When Romney performed well at the debate, the kid's social studies teacher said debates don't matter, and someone asked where does that put the Debate Club?

One more: I was in college when I first saw the word "doable". I assumed this was an old word, probably from Shakespeare or so, pronounced as "doble". I remember being embarassed to find the natural etymology in section discussion.

I also went through most of my childhood thinking "misled" was a unique, non-parsable word pronounced as "mizel'd". (I hope that's intelligible.) I knew the real word, but didn't associate the spelling with the word, somehow.

Not even the lapdog media whores can prop him up. That is quite a change from 2008. I guess American voters are smart but only slowly and surely. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, and all that and all that.

Obama's still pretty likeable, but his campaign really miscalculated by going overboard in trying to portray Romney as an evil vampire. Once the latter got on TV, all the millions that Obama spent on ads went up in smoke.

On a serious note however, Urkel is a con-man, plain and simple. He's been able to ambitiously navigate his way through the political maze of glad-handing and brown nosing with leftist anti-colonial ideology and political aspirations in hand. The idea that this neophyte who's never held a real paying job before in his life, much less ran or managed anything, found himself in the political sphere of US Senators, then leap frogging into the sphere of presidential politics amongst people like Hillary Clinton who believed herself the next rightful heir to the presidency only to have it usurped by this no one senator from Illinois who got there by sheer timing and misfortune of his opponents, who has/had no record, and a past of dubious, yet under-the-radar note, along with his other dubious relationships with radical leftists all along the way. Who's familial relationships are as broken and scattered as the father who sired him, only to become POTUS.

Fancy that. His cult of personality started happening in 2004 when he gave his skinny kid keynote speech at the DNC convention that year. From there on in, he still flew under the radar, but was whispered as an up and coming rock star within the Democrat party. Fancy that. Not until he won Iowa did peoples heads snap up and take a look at this skinny kid from Chicago/Hawaii. Remember who started the birther talk? The Clintons. Remember who put his past in a dubious light? The Clintons. However, the media, wary of a Clintonian dynasty that was seen as an apparent promotion from New York Senator to president, shifted their gaze away from her and uplifted The Great Urkel. However, they did it only at face value. They never dug any deeper than they had to because now they had become invested in seeing this 'skinny' black kid as their race mongering savior. Now they could finally have a candidate (since Jesse Jackson was such an easy stain to ignore) that was of mixed race, even though only cared about the one they saw, and neglected everything else about him.

We all know it. We all saw it. Left and right. However, leftards fell under the spell and have never been the same again. The Democrat Party had finally gone off the cliff, into the Faustian deep end, that there was no turning back for them. Don't believe me. Look at the utter adulation they gave Urkel when he won his prize and they all wept. Wept like Christ himself had landed on earth to save them all from their collective guilt. Oops.

Oh how the mighty godhead has fallen. And in his political and messianic failure, the mouth-breathing Urkel zombies are out walking again to ensure his failure continues lest their entire political ideology and ideas get killed for what they are; a scam and a lie that is predicated on the total and utter gullibility of an electorate that has bought into their ideology of their lies of a government run safety net that will always be there for them regardless of how much it costs because they will never, ever have to pay for it. That half of America are the real suckers who are making sure the other half isn't left out in the cold of fairness of opportunity that they will get on the other half's dime. Fancy that.

But some voters knew that's all he had; other voters overlooked it, others didn't think to look for anything else, and still others didn't care.

So here lies America, with a failed president, bereft of ideas, with no chance of success in a second term, and the question remains: How many Obama voters will recognize and then remediate their mistakes?

In the movie, All the President's Men (the best movie ever), Robert Redford does not know who "Colson" (WH Consul) is. His boss talks about a caption on the wall of Colson: If you get them by their balls, their hearts and minds will follow.

As someone who interned at the NYT (sports desk) before joining the Obama campaign in 2008, I know what this means in new paper business. If you control the eye-ball of the reader, you can direct them to action as needed.

Jill A., Dean P. are both old friends of Gail Collins. They have a guilt over Obama. They did not vet him Now, if they report and he loses, then what does till about themselves?

ABO voters will walk over cut glass. BO's youth brigade will barely bestir themselves out of bed that day to get to the polls. The deciding factor may be whether the Dems' war on women malarkey has energized single women to vote in the high percentages and the high percentages for Obama that they did in '08.

"The Republican nominee now ties the president among women who are likely voters, 48%-48%, while he leads by 12 points among men…

“In every poll, we’ve seen a major surge among women in favorability for Romney” since his strong performance in the first debate, veteran Democratic pollster Celinda Lake says. “Women went into the debate actively disliking Romney, and they came out thinking he might understand their lives and might be able to get something done for them.”…

The likeability of Obama always struck me as simply the power of people wanting it to be true, so the dream could happen. OK, it happened, we don't need to pretend anymore. He's just a man now, not a symbol.

Oh, and it looks as though Biden's behavior during the debate did not endear him to older ladies in swing states. From the Atlantic:

"I thought Paul Ryan came out looking very responsible and intelligent, and personally I did not think the vice president did," said Susan Seifert, a 65-year-old retired housewife who lives on a farm in rural Ohio and brought her 16-year-old granddaughter here to see Ryan and Romney the day after the debate. Given the way he acted, she said -- "all that smirking and grinning" -- Biden "doesn't seem to be taking the country very seriously."

Several older women I met at the rally put it in similar terms: Ryan, 42, struck them as a nice young man, Biden, 69, a grating boor. Some Republicans might have wished Ryan pushed back harder against Biden's aggressive assault, but these ladies appreciate that he minded his manners."

Irritating senior citizens in Ohio - now there's a great campaign strategy!

I think to a lot of us who voted for him, and probably will again, he always was just a man. To some people, particularly blacks, he was more than that for obvious and (to me) understandable reasons. I sure didn't begrudge anyone making him a symbol.

" they came out thinking he might understand their lives and might be able to get something done for them.”…

That's pathetic. Nobody is ever gonna meet that standard. He doesn't know you, it's not about you, and try thinking of something larger than yourself. We don't elect Santa Claus - he just shows up, usually drunk. Even then, he stops coming around when you get to the 3rd grade.

@bob ellison: i did exactly the same thing with misled, except i was a junior in college before i figured this out. an ex-girlfriend's aunt was taking a picture of my ex-gf and i taking with her mother at the exact instant i realized they were the same word. the picture is a classic of incredulous consternation.

What I have noticed is that liberals who take a shine to you always assume that you are liberal too. I can't tell how many times that's happened to me.

They think you're pleasant, you seem educated, you read books and go to art galleries and chew with your mouth closed - so, of course, you must be liberal! Hey, isn't Obama great? When you indicate, ever so politely that you disagree, they are taken aback.

phx, I don't know many rural conservatives (hell, I don't know any rural conservatives) so I can't speak for them, but I know suburban ones. They really don't go around assuming that all their friends are conservatives. In my experience, conservatives are much less likely to use politics as a personal litmus test.

I was once liberal myself. I have found conservatives are much more tolerant of differing viewpoints than liberals are.

My personal RL experience is a lot like here. I get along very well with a lot of conservatives. But in virtually all cases, I'm the one that has to do the work to show I'm willing to be friends and I'm willing to respect someone with different political beliefs. When I demonstrate that, conservatives are willing to give respect and show friendliness.

But I'm always the one who does the work first. The assumption is always I'm an asshole because of my political beliefs, until I prove otherwise.

What serious person gives a fuck about likeable. In my 65 years I've never given a shit about likeable. Yeah, it can have influence, but when the rubber meets the road it's in the back seat for sure. Not driving. That's when skill takes over.

phx, a person can only call you evil for your beliefs so often before you write that person off.

Andy R. is one of the members of this community whom I simply scroll past. He has nothing to add to the conversation that I have seen. He's not the best example you could have picked in your argument with Shouting Thomas.

FWIW, I come from a pretty conservative rural community. Seven years ago most of it came up to NYC to see me marry a wonderful Latina from the Bronx. Honestly, only one member of my extended family has been anything except loving towards her and our two children. And that one is an aunt by marriage, and not generally well-liked by anyone. (She's also a registered Democrat, but to be fair I doubt she has an Obama sign in her yard.)

Mark if we're talking about who is more tolerant of who, liberals or conservatives, well then Andy R is the perfect example to use for some of you since you feel that way about him.

Because there are people here who I've felt just as bad or worse about than you, and I've been willing to reach out to them.

But hey, stick to your guns, that's fine. I'm not selling anything to anyone. Just don't try to sell me that conservatives are more tolerant than liberals if you can't even make an effort to say a single civil thing to your worse opponent.

Hell, that's not even good warfare. Didn't you guys ever read the Art of War?

There's an old saw that Liberals think Conservatives are evil, while Conservatives think Liberals are stupid.

Always amusing, considering Liberals tend to be either very well educated or not educated at all, and Conservatives tend to be very socially prim and proper or total libertines. (Hey, I'm libertarian and I'm proud.)

So Liberals tend to be okay with sleazy tactics/actions by "Liberal" politicians while Conservatives will put up with all kinds of stupid by "Conservative" politicians.

Jesus Andy R's not even much of a name caller. Well sometimes but he don't dish out nowhere near what he takes. Just sit back and watch objectively some time - don't take part, just evaluate. Andy just sells his political point of view without compromising. Good on him. He's a warrior. Some of you can't disentangle your personal feelings and egos from your political positions.

And that's just bad tactics, bad form. Part of the problem with our country.

I'm just saying that particular point is almost never true in American politics. Certainly not on a small site of nobodies like us at Althouse.

It's not like any of us here has any real political power, or are responsible for whatever it is that plagues our country.

That's why it's literally nothing, nothing at all for me to take the most obnoxious, bigoted, stereotyped racist of a right-winger and be willing to have a drink, a few laughs, talk some music, before getting back to the political argument.

He doesn't have any real power - except maybe over his kids, and they probably already want to be the opposite of him anyway. He's an impotent nobody.

Same is true of your worst stereotyped liberal.

Certainly true of 99% of Althouse denizens I would guess. What, me get angry at you? Why???

And this red line thing knows so much more than I do. Except for all those things it didn't know. That's my favorite thing on the dropdown menu, the one that goes, learn bitch. Like just now it says dropdown is wrong and I'm over here going, well for now on it's right. Bitch.

For we cannot be ruled by the dotted red line.

And no, I really like people of differing color shade persuasions but I don't like Himself. I reach out to them but not that guy. Just last night for instance, late in the evening when regular people are asleep there was a noisome pounding at the neighbor's door. Pounding and pounding. This happened before and I just let it go on until it resolved itself, but then I felt bad because maybe the guy had to go to the bathroom and I resolved not to be so standoffish and distant again and so this time I didn't. there it was again, the pounding. So I opened my door and asked, "Are you okay?" Embarrassed, he apologized for the noise.

Do you have to go to the bathroom?

What?

There's one right here, a foot away.

Uh, no. No. No problem.

A refreshing beverage?

No. ha ha ha ha What?

Mac and cheese?

No. I'm fine. He'll be right out. I'm fine. Everything's okay. Sorry.

See? I reached out to an unknown entity and boldly face potential danger, and now the neighbor guy thinks I'm a perv. But I would not reach out like that to Himself, a known entity, instead I'd be thinking, ha ha ha piss your pants you no-key-having little bitch.

Jesus Andy R's not even much of a name caller. Well sometimes but he don't dish out nowhere near what he takes. Just sit back and watch objectively some time - don't take part, just evaluate. Andy just sells his political point of view without compromising. Good on him. He's a warrior. Some of you can't disentangle your personal feelings and egos from your political positions.

We could all do a better job of depersonalizing our conflicts, but Andy's a terrible example. Several resident lefties are at least clever, or insightful, or (in Inga's case) possessed of a modicum of a personality. Andy is an unimaginative credulous fool who resembles nothing so much as a Jim Crow-era racist that hates only because it's popular to do so.

I'm not sure it's got anything to do with who is a name-caller or not.

Reminds me of that self-important guy who got all hurt that Althouse said his argument was bull shit. He objected to "bull shit" because it was awful and hurtful and uncivil... or something. At any rate, it offended his own feelings about the level of discourse he was entitled to receive.

I call Andy a bigot because he is a bigot. It doesn't matter if he name-calls or not if he's expressing bigotry. A person can be entirely "civil" and say the most offensive things and hold the most blinkered and prejudiced opinions. All without ever name-calling.

(It's actually not fair to use Andy as an example here since he's not around. Sorry, Andy.)

Other than that I *try* to avoid empty and personal rants and I *try* to take every comment on it's own merit no matter who it's from. No opposition for the sake of opposition.

But I do expect liberals I meet in real life to express themselves as if every person they meet agrees with them. And yes, it would probably take them making an effort before I decided they were an exception to the rule. Maybe that's unfair. Maybe I wouldn't notice if a conservative acted the same way. But it is what I expect and I don't think it's a figment of my imagination.

As I said, I never see him dish it out the way you guys do. Some of you don't see yourselves at all. You write yourselves excuses.

With respect (sincerely), I think that your perception of his relentless and baseless accusations of bigotry as not "dishing it out" is itself inaccurate. It's not as original as many of his critics', but it is absolutely full of hate.

Does that excuse things? Probably not. But the question, as I understand it, is whether the hate is expressed, and in this case, it is.